3 Comments

Here’s the basic text from his website. You will find links to his press releases and letters on the same page

An “All of the Above” Energy Policy
The American public is desperate for solutions, but a national energy tax is not the answer. I strongly support the “all of the above” American Energy Act (H.R. 2846) —a better solution that offers more affordable energy, more good-paying jobs, and greater energy independence.

The American Energy Act charts a new course by laying down a national goal of licensing 100 new nuclear reactors over the next 20 years. With more than 31 announced reactor applications already in the pipeline, this goal can be achieved. Renewing our commitment to nuclear power will also revitalize an entire manufacturing sector, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs.

Our nation must also develop more of our own domestic natural resources, such as oil, coal, and natural gas. This act opens up for exploration the Arctic Coastal Plain as well as environmentally-sound leasing for oil and natural gas in the Outer Continental Shelf and oil shale in the Mountain West. Revenues generated by the sales of leases would be deposited in a Renewable and Alternative Energy Trust Fund to encourage the development of renewable and alternative energy technologies. Finally, this bill encourages personal responsibility through conservation.

The commonsense American Energy Act is aimed at more energy production, cheaper fuel bills, more jobs, and greater energy independence, which will also yield a cleaner environment and a more secure nation.

Expanding Nuclear Power Will Reduce Emissions and Create Jobs
I strongly believe that nuclear power plays a crucial role in fortifying our energy security and independence. Nuclear is not only emissions-free, but renewing our commitment to nuclear power will create countless jobs at a time when our nation endures near double-digit unemployment.

It is confounding that the 1,000-page climate bill that the House Democrat leadership is railroading through Congress, purportedly to reduce emissions, ignores the very source that accounts for over 70 percent of our nation’s emissions-free electricity: nuclear power.

We have to get our priorities straight. We are all familiar with the benefits of nuclear power with the Cook and Palisades plants along our shorelines. Overall, the United States has 104 operating nuclear reactors, generating 20 percent of the nation’s electricity. Other developed countries rely more heavily on nuclear energy, such as France, which gets 80 percent of all its power from nuclear.

The above mentioned American Energy Act calls for the construction of 100 new nuclear reactors over the next 20 years. The expansion of nuclear power would create hundreds of thousands of good-paying, high-skilled and permanent jobs. According to data from Oxford Economics, building 100 new nuclear reactors and an appropriate number of enrichment and reprocessing plants over this period of time would create 356,000 manufacturing and construction jobs, 242,000 permanent jobs, and an additional 404,000 jobs from induced economic activity. In total, this amounts to over 1 million new jobs.

By contrast, recent estimates predict that the reckless cap-and-tax scheme being pushed by leading Democrats will kill millions of jobs and result in an annual $4,300 per family national energy tax at a time when working families can least afford it. Under our “all of the above” plan, we can create jobs and keep electricity costs down for families. It is possible to simultaneously preserve our environment and jobs through commonsense policies.

This posting in the New York Times Environment Section They also cover the issue of the EPA trying to regulate energy plant water cooling operations which will add to the costs of running and maintaining up to 400 plants throughout the US.

Blackburn said she supports U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander’s, R-Tenn., proposal to build 100 nuclear power plants within 20 years.

“That’s a great concept,” said Blackburn.

During a short keynote address Monday morning, Blackburn said some politicians and critics haven’t yet embraced nuclear power as an option in the nation’s struggle to become energy independent and reduce emissions.

“They’ve looked at the downside,” Blackburn said, arguing that Congress has focused on picking winners and losers in its policy battles, including in the 2007 Energy Act.

However, she said that nuclear power is a “green” technology that should be part of an “all-of-the-above” energy policy, including clean coal as well as hydroelectric, solar and wind power. She said there is bipartisan support in Congress for that approach.